Most employers have you sign a waiver when you are hired that says they can piss test you, in all of these waivers it includes legal and illegal drugs, namely alchohol. So yes, employer can piss test you for anything they want, if you sign the waiver.

You're absolutely right. The point is, as marijuana gains a level of national "acceptance" (or whatever term you'd prefer), companies will begin to treat the use of marijuana the way they currently treat alcohol; when both are legal, companies who choose not to employ users of either, effectively limit themselves on the types of people they hire. This can be detrimental, or to their favor-- the jury's still out. There are many companies that do not drug test-- Apple, most (non-physical labor) retail, many small businesses, etc-- and many that do.

__________________Bacon-wrapped shrimp: My first-favorite food wrapped around my third-favorite food. I'd go to a banquet in honor of those Somali pirates if they served bacon-wrapped shrimp.

And just out of curiousity, what is the recourse for an employer who finds out that you have tested positive for alcohol? Or any other legal substance? Seems like it would be grounds for a lawsuit unless the company could prove it was demonstrably harming your work.

Not if, by accepting that job, you have agreed that you will not use alcohol. You're ESPECIALLY screwed if you live in a right-to-work state. I'm a huge proponent of allowing companies to do whatever they want, but they do accept a level of risk when they don't hire certain people (see: Fitch, Abercrombie v non-whites), treat employees poorly (see Mart, Wal), or fail to see that people who recreationally or casually use drugs can still be professionally productive (see: Apple).

__________________Bacon-wrapped shrimp: My first-favorite food wrapped around my third-favorite food. I'd go to a banquet in honor of those Somali pirates if they served bacon-wrapped shrimp.

If you'd like to know the true depth of hypocrisy of our federal government in terms of classifying cannabis as a drug with no medicinal value, take a look at the verbiage in US Patent 6630507, titled “Cannabinoids as antioxidants and neuroprotectants”, held by the US Government as represented by the Dept. of Health and Human Services.

The patent claims;
"Cannabinoids have been found to have antioxidant properties, unrelated to NMDA receptor antagonism. This new found property makes cannabinoids useful in the treatment and prophylaxis of wide variety of oxidation associated diseases, such as ischemic, age-related, inflammatory and autoimmune diseases.The cannabinoids are found to have particular application as neuroprotectants, for example in limiting neurological damage following ischemic insults, such as stroke and trauma, or in the treatment of neurodegenerative diseases, such as Alzheimer’s disease, Parkinson’s disease and HIV dementia.”

Our government knows that cannabis is effective against Alzheimer's, it's right there in black & white. Our government knows about the alarming Alzheimer's "epidemic" we're starting to experience in this country. Yet our government refuses to do anything about it, and we as a citizenry sit and do nothing. We allow ourselves to be brainwashed into thinking that voting for any candidate other than republican or democrat--which is the only way things are ever going to change--is "throwing our vote away". We deserve the shitshow masquerading as leadership that we get because we're the morons who keep electing them, even though we have alternatives available right there on the ballot.

The average American has the IQ of a prairie dog, and the scariest thing is, by definition, half of us are even dumber than that.

I also believe the lawmakers in these 2 states will delay the true passing of this bill even longer. I will preface this with you should not drive under the influence or while consuming any substance that may impair your judgement.

How will the enforce driving under the influence or open container. Will there be some sort of a "seal" on all packages of weed that once broken you can not transport that weed in your car. Such as for alcohol, if a container is open, you get a ticket. The other side of that is testing for those under the influence. In alcohol there are blood test, breath test, with marijuana there is no test to see if the person is currently under the influence, just if they have used it in most cases in the past 2 weeks or so.

I also believe the lawmakers in these 2 states will delay the true passing of this bill even longer. I will preface this with you should not drive under the influence or while consuming any substance that may impair your judgement.

How will the enforce driving under the influence or open container. Will there be some sort of a "seal" on all packages of weed that once broken you can not transport that weed in your car. Such as for alcohol, if a container is open, you get a ticket. The other side of that is testing for those under the influence. In alcohol there are blood test, breath test, with marijuana there is no test to see if the person is currently under the influence, just if they have used it in most cases in the past 2 weeks or so.

Not in Washington. Full legalization of being in possession of an ounce of "usable marijuana" begins December 6th. And they sound like they're willing to fight the feds over it.

“Do you want to be a retailer, distributor, or manufacturer,” said Beth Lehman, as she talked to a caller in the Liquor Control Board Licensing Division office. She says dozens of people had called today in the aftermath of voter approved I-502.

The initiative will allow Washingtonians to possess an ounce of “usable marijuana” beginning on December 6.

However, the LCB has a year to devise a full licensing program, which includes a $250 application fee and a $1,000 annual renewal fee.

It could also been a boon for the department which nearly went bust due to the liquor privatization initiative last year.

“We will have to hire people. There will be staff expansion. How much we don’t know. We don’t know what the market will look like,” says Mikhail Carpenter, of the Liquor Control Board.

That’s because it’s still unclear if the Justice Department will try to curb cannabis use, which is still illegal under Federal law. It could potentially put State Employees in difficult position, licensing, and helping distribute an illegal substance.

U.S. Attorney Jenny Durkan, through a spokesperson, wrote Wednesday that “enforcement of the Controlled Substances Act remains unchanged.”

“It does plainly set up a conflict with federal law,” said Seattle City Attorney Peter Holmes, “I guess I’m the eternal optimist it doesn’t require this to be a showdown.”

Dan Sytman, a spokesperson for the Washington State Attorney General’s Office, says, “Our position on all initiatives and referenda passed by the people is that they are legal.” He added that the office is prepared “to defend such measures in court.”

And just out of curiousity, what is the recourse for an employer who finds out that you have tested positive for alcohol? Or any other legal substance? Seems like it would be grounds for a lawsuit unless the company could prove it was demonstrably harming your work.

You have no recourse, you signed a consent to have your ass canned if you get caught on anything they deem necessary to put on that paper.

Any employer who piss tests has you sign a waiver in your hire packet. If they don't, then they can't piss test you. But they do.

This is interesting...would there be any way to keep private from the feds the names of those that got a license to sell or grow? Just think the feds would come in and get that list of names and go to town otherwise.

And thanks to whoever kept this out of DC...I don't even see that forum, and am really enjoying this thread, is an interesting topic that I believe many on this board are interested in.

This is interesting...would there be any way to keep private from the feds the names of those that got a license to sell or grow? Just think the feds would come in and get that list of names and go to town otherwise.

And thanks to whoever kept this out of DC...I don't even see that forum, and am really enjoying this thread, is an interesting topic that I believe many on this board are interested in.

Well I would say in the near future with either of these states we are about to find out. Expect some shenanigan bullshit and a possible supreme court case.

My bet is that popular opinion, whether Democrat or Republican, will be that the Feds can **** out of states business.

I can understand the Federal Government's right to police interstate commerce, but if the pot stays here in my state, I say they have no room to do anything to any individual.

It's a scam that my brother's friend, who is an attorney in CA has been fighting for years.

Here is how it works in CA:

1. Legalize medical mary-jane
2. Open shops, farms, etc.
3. Feds bust in, arrest you and take everything you own
4. While you're waiting on your court date your shit is auctioned off
5. You are finally found to be innocent but your shit is gone. No house, car, nothing. Plus you still owe your attorney and the courts

CNBC did a special on medical mary-jane about a year or two ago. According to that special, medical mj is almost single-handidly holding up the northern CA economy. Several small business owners who were going broke switched to selling medical pot.

One shop owner says he has paid $100's of $1,000's in taxes and his take is as long as you are paying your taxes at the Fed level and not trying to thumb your nose at the feds they will leave you alone.

__________________

Quote:

Originally Posted by |Zach|

All kinds of people vote. Not enough of those people think highly enough of Trump to make him President but all kinds of people vote.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Donger

So, if they were polling better than Trump and the primary goal was to prevent Hillary from becoming POTUS, perhaps it would have been a better strategic decision to nominate someone who actually had a chance of beating her and preventing that than nominating Donald Trump.

I also believe the lawmakers in these 2 states will delay the true passing of this bill even longer. I will preface this with you should not drive under the influence or while consuming any substance that may impair your judgement.

How will the enforce driving under the influence or open container. Will there be some sort of a "seal" on all packages of weed that once broken you can not transport that weed in your car. Such as for alcohol, if a container is open, you get a ticket. The other side of that is testing for those under the influence. In alcohol there are blood test, breath test, with marijuana there is no test to see if the person is currently under the influence, just if they have used it in most cases in the past 2 weeks or so.

In Colorado, it goes into effect without any lawmaker impact on the personal consumption side. The retail side does require some State work, but if they don't do it by the beginning of 2014, I think it becomes an unregulated free-for-all.